OpenText UFT One vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while SmartBear is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8. OpenText holds a 10.6% mindshare in TAt, compared to SmartBear’s 6.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

8,510 Views
5,319 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

SmartBear TestComplete

Read 75 SmartBear TestComplete reviews

4,852 Views
3,527 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

SmartBear TestComplete

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestComplete are competitive products in the test automation market. OpenText UFT One appears to have a technical edge due to its feature-rich support for various technologies and robust integration capabilities, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is favored for its cost-effectiveness and easier entry for smaller-scale automation needs.

Features: OpenText UFT One is strong in diverse browser support, robust integration with Excel and ALM, and includes InsightObject methods and testing extensibility. SmartBear TestComplete provides ease of use with direct access to object properties, and comprehensive web, desktop, and mobile testing capabilities, although it may struggle with dynamic object recognition and performance in complex environments.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One could enhance stability, reduce memory usage, and improve browser compatibility and integration with open-source tools while offering more competitive pricing. SmartBear TestComplete would benefit from improving intuitive object mapping, enhancing support for modern web frameworks, and expanding features for mobile testing. Both tools need UI and integration enhancements to alleviate user challenges.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One allows deployment in on-premises and private cloud environments, while SmartBear TestComplete's on-premises deployment suits users desiring straightforward licensing. OpenText UFT One's customer service can be excellent but variable due to reliance on external support. SmartBear TestComplete, meanwhile, enjoys solid partner support and rapid responses to enhance user satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is regarded as expensive with a complex licensing model, yet provides substantial ROI for large enterprises needing extensive automation. SmartBear TestComplete, being more economical, attracts organizations looking for cost-effective solutions through its flexible licensing. While OpenText UFT One requires a higher initial investment, its advanced features promise significant returns, as TestComplete offers savings and value through efficient usage and flexible licensing.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 831,158 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)

SmartBear TestComplete

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

5th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

6th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.6%, down from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 6.2%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

Read full review

Prakhar Goel

Sr Test Lead at Emerson

Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation

The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

"On a scale of one to ten, I would give OpenText UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."

"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."

"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."

"Selenium integration."

"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."

"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"This company offers end-to-end capabilities for test suite creation and execution. One feature that I particularly appreciate is the tagging system. Tags are highly valuable, as they allow you to assign tags to your test cases. When there's an impact in a specific area, you can search for and run all test cases associated with that tag. I find this functionality very useful."

"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."

"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."

More SmartBear TestComplete pros

Cons

"We'd like it to have less scripting."

"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."

"Previously, the product was a script-based solution. Presently, the tool offers non-script, no-code, or low-code functionalities, making it an area where improvements are required."

"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."

"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."

"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."

"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."

"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."

"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."

"The integration tools could be better."

"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."

"Right now, the product only supports Windows."

"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."

"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."

"In the cross-browser domain, it has a few snags with Microsoft Edge and Chrome; although, these problems are not critical."

More SmartBear TestComplete cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."

"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The price is one aspect that could be improved."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."

"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."

"TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module."

"The solution's licensing cost has increased because it has moved to some new SLM-based licenses."

"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."

"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."

"The solution's pricing is too high."

"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."

More SmartBear TestComplete pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?

We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?

My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

UFT still requires some coding. If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again. Additionally, customer support could be improved as they take days to ...

See all answers

What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?

I don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?

The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 22% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 12% of the time

Qt Squish vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 10% of the time

Katalon Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 9% of the time

Eggplant Test vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 7% of the time

More SmartBear TestComplete Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

January 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete

December 2024

Download SmartBear TestComplete product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)

No data available

Learn More

OpenText

SmartBear

Overview

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper

What is SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete is a reliable, sturdy automated testing platform created by SmartBear Software. SmartBear Software is a worldwide technological leader known for developing quality enterprise-class development and testing solutions.

TestComplete simplifies the process of creating tests for numerous applications, including, but not limited to; Desktop, Android, IOS, Web browsers, and Windows. Application tests can be manual, scripted, and even recorded by using keyword-driven or data-driven functionality. There are even additional options for error reporting and automated playback. The object repository is extremely accurate and is fully customizable. TestComplete can easily be used by experienced developers and even by manual novice testers to develop quality automated UI tests quickly.

TestComplete offers three different testing scenarios:

Desktop: Users can easily and quickly automate UI tests using today’s most popular desktop applications, such as; Windows, Java, Python,.Net, VBScript, and more.
Web: Users can effortlessly create renewable tests for all of today’s popular web applications, including JavaScript frameworks on 2000+ trusted browser and platform integrations.
Mobile: Users can safely build and automate serviceable UI tests on actual or virtual android or IOS devices, locally or in the cloud. Users can create code or codeless tests. TestComplete seamlessly integrates with many of today’s popular frameworks.

Key Features

Easily create automated UI tests: TestComplete offers scriptless Record and Replay or simple keyword-driven tests to quickly develop any type of UI test users may require. Tests can be recorded once, then replayed when needed across various applications on mobile, web, or desktop environments. TestComplete integrates with many different languages, such as Java, Python, C+, and more.
Keyword driven tests: Users can easily divide testing steps, actions, objects, and data with an integrated keyword-driven test structure. This makes it easy for every user to participate in the test automation process; there is no programming experience needed. Everything is made simple with easy-to-use point-and-click options.
Data driven tests: Easily distinguish data from test commands to keep administrative efforts simple. Users can improve overall coverage by running various automated mobile, desktop, or web UI tests.
Record and Replay: Users can reuse created automated tests across every environment as often as desired. This helps to expand overall test coverage and represents a huge cost and time savings.

Reviews from Real Users

Sandhiya T S., Sr Solutions Engineer at Lexington Soft, relates, “The record and replay aspects of the solution are quite useful for people. With them, you don't have to write any scripts. Basically, you can record your actions and play them back later. The initial setup is also very easy.”

Sai S R., Staff Test Architect at a tech services company, says, "The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them."

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

December 2024

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.